Disposed

Lenin Kumar Kambam v. Union of India

Telangana HC9 Oct 2025WP/25943/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged alleged coercive and harassing credit card loan recovery methods violating RBI recovery agent guidelines. Court disposed of the petition in terms of its earlier order in W.P.No.5200 of 2024, directing respondents and their agents to strictly follow RBI circular dated 12.08.2022 and Supreme Court rulings on recovery agent conduct.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to follow RBI circular dated 12.08.2022 and Supreme Court guidelines while recovering loan amounts from petitioner; no costs.

Lenin Kumar Kambam Vs Union of India — Banking and Recovery | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

[3300 ]

¶3

THURSDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 25943 OF 2025

¶7

Betwee n:

¶8

Lenin Kumar Kambam, S/o Santha Kumar Age 37^years, Occ Pvt Employee R/o SGS Prestige apartment, Venkata Ramana Colony, Flat No 304, Gokul Plots, Kukatpally, Telangana^- 500072

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

Union of lndia, Represent by it's Secretary, .tvlinistry of Finance, New^Delhi 2. Reserve Bank of lndia^(RBl), Represent by its Chief General Manager,^6, Sansad lrlarg, New Delhi - 1 10001

¶12

SBI Cards Payment Services Pvt Limited, Rep. by its Chief Manager,^Unit Nos. 3C, 3D and 3E, 3rd Floor, Queens Plaza, S. P. Road, Secunderabad, Telangana-500003

¶13

...RESPONDENTS

¶14

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of^{lndia praying} that^{in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith,^{the High Court maybe} pleased to issue an approprrate Writ, Order, or Direction, more^particularly in the nature of Writ of lrrlandamus, declaring the action of^{respondentNo.} 3ⁱⁿ attempting to recover amounts from the^petitioner in an arbitrary,^illegal,and high-handed manner without following the due^process of law and in^blatant violatron of the Reserve Bank of India Circular dated^12.08.2022 bearing^No. RBll2O22-231 108, DOR.ORG REC.65/21 .O4.15812022-23, and further^declaring the inaction of respondent No. 2 in enforcing the said Circular as^{unconstitutional} and violative of Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the^Constitution of^India,and consequently direct the respondent authorities to^{refrain fromundertaking any} coercive or unlawful recovery measures against the^{petitionerand} to^strictly comply with the due process of law and the aforesaid^Circularin all^recovery proceedings, and further restrain respondent No.3, their agents, recovery

¶15

; .;::._-t ',*s 1{+a -ii

¶16

agents, executives, managers, or any person acting : t lheir behalf from engaging in any acts of intimidation, harassment, humiliatic r , or intrusion into the privacy of the petitioner or his family members, refereesr or f:"iends, including persistent or anonymous calls, threatening messages, or rhysrcal visits to the petitioner's premises, and further direct respondent No. 2 t() enforce the said RBI circular in letter and spirit and to inrtiate appropriate and s r ngent action against the errant officials of respondent No. 3 for violating le!la rorms, and pending disposal of the writ petitron, direct the respondent No I rot to resort to any coercive measures against the petitioner except through twful means and in strict adherence to the Circular dated 12.O8.2022

¶17

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. BONTHU LOKESH PHANlt,l )RA REDDY

¶18

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRI KALVALA SANJEE,

¶19

(sc FoR CENTRAL ( OVT )

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2&3:-

¶21

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶22

I I I I I I I i I I i

¶23

i I I

¶24

I I t i

¶25

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA

¶26

WRIT PETITIoN No.25943 of 2025

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

Sri Il. Lokesh Phanindra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri K. Sanjeev, learned Standing Counsel lor Central Government, for respondent No. 1.

¶29

Whcn the mattcr is laken up for hearing, lcarned counsel for petitioner submitted that the issue raised in this Writ Petition is squarely covered by the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.S2OO of 2024, dated 25.04.2024 and therefore, the samc order may be passed rn this writ petition as well. The operative portion of the said order reads as und.er:

¶30

,} \

¶31

"8. For the aforesaid rcasons and as the procedure adopted by the respondent Nos.4 b 7 for recovery of loan amount from the pctitioner, amounts to violation of thc rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, this Court deems it appropriate to direct tlle respondents, to ensure that the agents engaged by them for recovery of the loan amounts, shall strictly follow tJle guidelines and instructions issued by the Reserve Bank of India and also the judgmcnts of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in ICICI Bank Ltd Vs. Prakash Kaur's case (1 supra) and ICICI Bank Vs. Shanti Devi Sharma's case (2 supra). 9. With the above said direction, the writ petitron is clisposed of."

¶32

\ {

¶33

3 Learned Standing Counsei for respondent No. t has no objection

¶34

Accordingly, in tcrms of thc order passed by this Court in W.P.No.5200 of 2024, dated 25.04.2024, and for the reasons alike, this writ

¶35

¶36

¶37

petition is disposcd of directing the respondent auth.rir r:s a.d their agents to scrupulously lollorv tire guid elines / ins lructio, s iss r .d b' the Rcser'c If ank ol india in its circular datecl 12.09.2 o22 anci rr.: r rbe judgmcr-rts oi Hon'blc Supreme court in ICICI Bank Ltd. v. prakari L Kaur'1s case and ICICI Bank v, Shanti Devi Sharma,2s case, *,hilc :.:co'r:ring the loan alnoullrs lrom thc petrtioner. No costs.

¶38

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shaJi ;tand closed

¶39

1 (2Oo7) 2 SCC 71 1 2(2008) 7 SCC 532

¶40

SD/- '. PONNA KRISHNA ;-TSQS I ;TANT REGISTRAR \il\ _^-

¶41

_^- <sup>secrroru oFFrcER _,

¶42

//TRUE COPY//

¶43

I^To,

¶44

The Secretary, Union of lndia, Ministry of Finance, New _ ;lhi z rne Reserve Bank of rndia (RBr), chi6f Generar rrranagr r 6. Sansad rr,4arg, New Delhi - 110001

¶45

one cc to SRr. BoNTHU LOKESH REDi)^. Advocare topucl 'HANTNDRA 4. one cc ro sRr. KALVALA SANJEEV 1sc ron ceriinii coviJib'ptcj' 5. Two CD Copies

¶46

B lvl PVt_

¶47

i [2007) 2 SCC 711 , (2008) 7 SCC 532

\ \

HIGH COURT

DATED:0911012025

THE *!
il;.']-r.
(
,.;<.1ir
s
) a;.:
(.) .I
ri| -',- 0 ! [11 ;ii,'ir
.$,,/
t::/''
r -.r l':ar .'...

¶52

ORDER

¶53

WP.No.25943 of 2025

¶54

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

Lenin Kumar Kambam v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lenin Kumar Kambam v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Venkumahanthi Naresh Kumar Vs Union of India

Chaganaboina Sree Devi Vs The Union of India

Bandari Janardhan Vs The State of Telangana

Manoj Jain, Vs The Branch Manager

Dr. Swetha Sampath Bobba Vs The Union of India

Adrm Hospital Vs The State of Telangana